The Neshaminy Board of School Directors met in public session on November 13, 2001 in the Board Room of the District Offices, Maple Point Middle School.  The following persons were in attendance:

1.    Call to Order

Mr. Stack called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.

2.   Pledge of Allegiance

      Mr. Stack requested those in attendance join in the salute to the flag.

3.   Announcements

Dr. Bowman announced this week is American Education Week.  He advised the Board of a Poquessing Middle School Program which involved fund raising and making a huge American Flag, which will be hung in the school’s cafeteria.  He said one of the best kept secrets in the Neshaminy School District is that the Poquessing Middle School is a great school.

4.   Educational Presentation – Poquessing Middle School Symposium

In attendance were Mr. Wert, Poquessing Middle School Technology Education teacher; Ms. Meket, Wheelabrator Community Relations Manager; Mr. Johnson, Heritage Conservancy Partnership Representative; and Poquessing Middle School students who have participated in the Neshaminy Creek Project (NCP).  Neshaminy Creek Project pamphlet distributed at the meeting.

Mr. Wert explained the Poquessing Middle School students (NCP Club members) worked on the Neshaminy Creek Project, which was sponsored by the Heritage Conservancy, Wheelabrator and Poquessing Middle School.  Information the students obtained through their research will be reviewed by an engineering group.  The engineering group will advise the students what needs to be done to make the creek at Lindsay Farm a properly functioning creek.  The students will work on the creek to make it a healthier stream.

The Poquessing School NCP Club members reviewed the purpose of the club, which is to inform the public about pollution in the creeks and how to prevent and correct the situation.  The students reviewed their research and how pollution affects the Neshaminy Creek located at the Lindsay Farm.

Mr. Johnson presented the Heritage Conservancy Partnership Award to the Poquessing School for their work in partnership with Wheelabrator-Falls.  Ms. Meket presented the students with a $500 check to be used for their set up costs.  She explained as long as the students maintain the required grade point average and attain appropriate SAT scores, each of the NCP Club members will be eligible for a full-tuition Fisk University scholarship when they are seniors in high school.  She announced Wheelabrator will commit $2,500 to the Heritage Conservancy to support the project and perhaps other grant money to support the creation of the creek bed. 

Ms. Meket explained the theme of the Wheelabrator Symposium is to identify a local community problem, ascertain a solution, interact with the appropriate agencies, etc.  The Neshaminy Creek Project is a great textbook model of what was intended when the symposium was designed.

5.   Public Comment

There was a three minute time limit per speaker.  Mr. Johnson, Penndel, expressed concern if the Tawanka Elementary School is closed and the Board decides to revisit the possible closing of a middle school in a few years, some students may be affected by a school closing a second time.  He recommended the Board put in place a provision that would prevent students affected by the school closing the first time from being moved again.

Mr. Ruger explained the Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club is self-supporting.  He requested recognition of the Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club, which would allow the game scores to be announced over the public address system and inclusion of the team’s picture in the yearbook.  There would be no cost to the District. 

Mr. Werner, Langhorne, explained his children attend the Lower Southampton Elementary School.  He expressed concern if the Tawanka Elementary School is closed, his children will be transferred to another school next year.  He also expressed concern that in a few years some of the same students may be affected a second time by the closing of a middle school.

In response to questions raised by Mr. Eccles regarding the Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club, Mr. Ruger explained the team plays in the Lower Bucks County Scholastic Hockey League.  The team is sanctioned and insured by U.S. Hockey.  Most of the team’s games are played at the Grundy Ice Rink.  The other teams in the league are Pennsbury, Bensalem, Truman, Archbishop Ryan, Conwell-Egan, Holy Ghost Prep and Father Judge High Schools.  The reason runs from September through March.  Neshaminy High School is the only area high school that does not announce the ice hockey game scores on the public address system.

Dr. Bowman pointed out the Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club is a private club and is not school sponsored.  The District allows the club to distribute fliers at the high school.  Dr. Bowman stated Mr. Wyatt will develop a fact sheet for distribution to the Board.  The Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club will be a future discussion agenda item.

 6.   Items for Discussion

      a.  Happy Days Learning Center Bus Transportation

Dr. Bowman recommended the Board consider providing bus transportation to the Happy Days Learning Center for the rest of the 2001-2002 school year.  He explained ten Neshaminy students attend the Happy Days Learning Center.  Two of the students would be walkers and eight of the students would be transported by bus.  The transportation cost is the same whether the ten students are transported to the Happy Days Learning Center or to their respective neighborhood bus stops.  The Happy Days Learning Center was under the impression transportation would be provided by the School District.  He emphasized the transportation would not be provided beyond this school year.

In response to Board members’ questions, Dr. Bowman explained transportation has been provided to the Happy Days Learning Center the last several years, because as a part of the regular bus run the bus drove past the Happy Days Learning Center.  This year the bus does not drive past the Happy Days Learning Center.  The Happy Days Learning Center is trying to obtain a van for next year.  Dr. Bowman emphasized he is recommending the transportation exception be made for this school year only. 

After further discussion, there was Board consensus to provide bus transportation to the Happy Days Learning Center for the remainder of the 2001-2002 school year only.

      b.  Personnel Report Changes/Format

Information distributed prior to meeting.  Mr. Jones reported he met with three Board members and reviewed the present Personnel Report format and possible changes.  Mr. Jones recommended the following changes:

Approval Date – One of the problems was the Board approving hirings after the individuals had already started working in the District.  Recommendation - The effective date column be replaced with an “approval date” column.  The approval date would be the day after the Board meets.

Education Preparation and Previous Professional Experience – Recommendation – Expand to include more detail.  Include education major areas and more detailed listing of previous experience. 

Mrs. Butville requested if the starting date is prior to the approval date, the starting date be included on the Personnel Report.  This would eliminate any misunderstanding of when the individual actually started working for the District.

Mr. Eccles inquired if the goal is to have no one start their employment with the District prior to Board approval.  Mrs. Butville stated the goal is to approve all new employees prior to their first day of employment.  However, if an individual does need to start their employment prior to Board approval, the Board should be notified and the actual start date listed on the Personnel Report.  She noted in some school districts, Board members are called for a verbal approval and then the hiring is approved at the next Board Meeting.

Dr. Bowman explained there will be cases when individuals will need to start their employment with the District prior to approval at a Public Board Meeting.  Mr. Stack recommended the Personnel Report be presented for approval twice a month to keep the approvals more current.  Dr. Bowman stated if an employee is out sick, someone must replace them.  The major issue is having the appropriate coverage in the classroom. 

Mr. Eccles inquired what would happen if an individual started working for the District prior to the Board approving the hiring and when presented to the Board, it was not approved.  Mr. Jones explained the individual would be advised the Board did not approve their hiring.  The days the individual had worked would be treated as though the individual was a substitute teacher in the classroom.  Dr. Bowman explained if an individual works 30 days in a classroom, they automatically become a long term per diem employee.  Mr. Jones stated the hiring could be listed on the report as a day-to-day substitute and after the Board approves the hiring it could be made retroactive according to the contract provisions. 

After further discussion, there was Board agreement that individuals (certified and support staff) starting their employment prior to Board approval will be listed as day-to-day substitutes on the Personnel Report.  Once the hirings are approved, they will be made retroactive according to the contract provisions.  Since the individuals would be listed as day-to-day substitutes until Board approval, a start date notation is not necessary on the Personnel Report.

The administration will make the changes (expanded educational experience and previous professional experience information and approval date) in the Personnel Report.

      c.  Summit Trace Open Space Parcels Tax Forgiveness

Letter from solicitor distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board the solicitor has recommended the taxes be waived on the Summit Trace open space parcels.  The recommendation is made only in the event that Bucks County and Middletown Township also waive the taxes.

 Dr. Bowman informed the Board that John Burke, Middletown Township Manager, has advised him Middletown Township will also be waiving the taxes on the Summit Trace open space parcels.  The Supervisors plan to approve the tax waiver at their next meeting.  The administration will ascertain the county’s position on the issue. 

Mrs. Butville noted two or three of the parcels could be sold and houses constructed on those parcels.  What would happen if the taxes are waived and in the future the parcels are sold for the construction of houses?  She noted if this occurs, the Board would lose the back taxes on the properties.  Mrs. Butville advised the Board that Middletown Township has been maintaining the parcels since 1991.  If the properties had been dedicated to Middletown Township, the District would not have received any taxes since 1991.

There was agreement if the county agrees to waive the taxes on the parcels, the tax forgiveness issue will be an agenda item at the November 27 Public Board Meeting.

      d.  School District Architect for Renovations and Construction

Information distributed at the meeting.  Dr. Bowman noted previously the Board had provided direction to the administration to review architects for future renovations, particularly Poquessing Middle School, Neshaminy High School, ADA projects and infrastructure.  Mr. Schoenstadt is serving as the Board’s representative on the team reviewing the issue.  Architects have been interviewed.  The next step is to obtain Board authorization to enter into a contract with one of the architects. 

Mr. Schoenstadt reviewed the architect comparison chart distributed at the meeting.  He explained before the Board can reach any renovation decisions, the Board needs to know the options available.  An architect is needed to study the various renovations/construction projects and determine what best suits the District.  Guidelines will be provided to the architect.

Mr. Schoenstadt stated all four architectural firms interviewed are top architectural firms in the country.  He noted the following:

·         The firms of BASCO, Gilbert and Breslin are located in the Lancaster/York area.  Therefore, they are well versed in the Pennsylvania School Code, Pennsylvania construction codes and bonds issues.

·         The ATS&R architectural firm is located in Minnesota.

·         Projects:

·         BASCO – Maple Point High School and five different Neshaminy projects

·         Gilbert – Council Rock North and South High Schools

·         ATS&R – Parkland High School (Allentown)

·         Breslin – Central Bucks West High School

Mr. Schoenstadt stated all four architectural firms are well qualified, could do an excellent job for the District and would prepare innovative and creative renovation plans.  Mr. Schoenstadt advised the Board of the following regarding each firm:

Breslin

·         Not a full-service firm

·         Contracts out many of the functions of an architectural firm to companies that perform the work as a contracted service.  This adds to the cost and minimizes the overall control.

ATS&R

·         Minnesota firm

·         In order to function in Pennsylvania, they have had to hire a local engineering firm in Doylestown.  This creates a coordination and communication problem.

·         No local office or way to coordinate project

·         Air travel required to coordinate project, which adds to the project cost

Gilbert

·         Outstanding firm

BASCO

·         Firm has totally new staff and is a much larger company than when it worked on the Maple Point High School project

·         Work done totally in house

·         Offered to open office in area to coordinate the project.  Local office would result in reducing the cost.  BASCO is trying to expand their business in Bucks County.  A project the size of the Neshaminy High School project would be beneficial to their expansion efforts.

Mr. Schoenstadt recommended the Board consider BASCO favorably.  He noted it will be several months before the architect will present any proposals and options to the Board.  He advised the Board Dr. Bowman, Mr. Minotti and Mr. Collins will provide the architect with educational and functional information.  The biggest question is energy savings.  Neshaminy High School is a very energy inefficient building that costs approximately $800,000 a year to operate. 

Mr. Dengler stated in the past he found that BASCO did not want to listen to the Board’s questions and concerns.  As an example, he cited the Maple Point and Sandburg Schools’ auditorium sound system situations.  Since BASCO did not listen to the Board’s concerns, it cost additional funds to correct the sound system situation in the two auditoriums.  Dr. Bowman stated one of the issues at the time was the amount of money the Board was willing to spend on the two projects.

Dr. Frank stated the Board should not forget the 30 years experience it has had with any firm.  In the long run, there will be problems with every firm.  Ultimately, BASCO’s work fits the bill, which is a very strong point in BASCO’s favor.

In response to Mr. Stack’s question about cost, Mr. Schoenstadt stated the team did not interview any economy level architects.  Those interviewed were all in the mid-range.  Generally, all the firms interviewed could do the job and would be in the same price range.  BASCO’s advantage is their experience and knowledge of the District, willingness to take all of the Board’s criteria into consideration and develop a program.  Mrs. Butville pointed out since BASCO has presented reports on the District’s needs and is familiar with the District, this may save the District time and money.

Mr. Schoenstadt advised the Board of the technology (i.e., three-dimensional computer program, etc.)  BASCO will utilize to develop the renovation plans.  He noted BASCO has a group working on geothermal energy.  Geothermal energy is one of the innovative projects BASCO would be willing to review.  The District needs to review innovative ways to conserve energy. 

Dr. Bowman advised the Board the issue of not having a project management group on board was explored.  The District would have its own clerk to monitor the project.  This would result in a cost savings of possibly $750,000.  The clerk would work for Mr. Minotti and the School Board.  The clerk would look out for the District’s primary interest rather than the architect’s primary interest.  BASCO was not opposed to this concept. 

Mr. Minotti indicated he was in favor of selecting BASCO as the architectural firm for the District’s renovation/construction projects.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board that Mr. Paradise had stated he could work with BASCO. 

There was Board consensus to develop a contract with the architectural firm of BASCO.  The administration will proceed with the development of a contract with BASCO for the District’s renovation/construction projects.

      e.  Additional Public Comment

Ms. Drioli recommended the agenda be amended to include additional public comment.  She noted it appeared the members of the public were not aware the meeting began at 7:00 p.m.  After a brief discussion, there was Board consensus to allow public comment a second time after the “school closing and attendance boundaries” (no. “6f”) agenda item.

      f.  School Closing and Attendance Boundaries

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Marotto explained when developing the attendance boundaries he considered the ideas the Facilities and Enrollment Committee had mentioned and the Board’s direction.  The primary factors considered when assigning census grids were as follows:

·         Balancing Building Program Capacities – Currently, the schools are very much out of balance.  The current elementary school attendance boundary lines were set in 1986.  Normally, attendance boundaries are set for five years.  Examples of the varying building program capacities are the Lower Southampton Elementary School only using 70 percent of its building capacity and the Everitt Elementary School is using 94 percent of its building capacity.  Capacity numbers range between 70 and 94 percent.  In the last 14 years there has been a tremendous amount of growth in the northern end of the District. 

·         Limiting the Number of Students having to Change Schools – Some students must change schools.  Efforts are being made to limit the number of students that must change schools while balancing the program capacity. 

·         Creating Boundaries Consisting of Contiguous Census Grids – An effort is being made to keep communities together as best as possible and eliminate checker boarding. 

·         Limiting Student Travel – Currently, students are traveling as long as 35 minutes to get to school.  Trying to limit travel time to a 35 minute maximum. 

Mr. Marotto explained he has developed various redistricting variations.  The attendance boundaries being presented may be changed/adjusted.  Dr. Bowman explained the administration knows how many students are in each census grid, their grade and the school the students are attending.  This data allows the administration to project the enrollment in a given building.  He reviewed the following attendance boundaries maps:

·         Present Boundaries for Elementary Schools

·         Proposed 2002-2003 Census Grids Relocated to New Schools

·         Proposed 2002-2003 Proposed Boundaries – Tawanka Closed

Dr. Bowman noted under the proposed 2002-2003 census grids relocated to new schools map, the following would occur:

·         All students now attending the Tawanka School who live in Lower Southampton Township will attend Lower Southampton Elementary School in the 2002-3003 school year.

·         No modular classrooms have been allocated for full-time regular classes.  The modular classrooms will be used for special education classes and other specialist classes such as reading, itinerant music, etc. 

·         The attendance boundaries are unchanged at the Ferderbar, Buck and Miller Elementary Schools.

·         Some students will be transferred out of the Everitt School and some students will be transferred to the Everitt School. 

·         Additional students will be attending the Schweitzer and Heckman Schools.

·         Districtwide 18.5 percent of the students will change schools.

Dr. Bowman reviewed the program capacity utilization rates under the proposed redistricting plan for 2002-2003, which are as follows:  Buck – 86 percent, Everitt – 87 percent, Heckman – 87 percent, Hoover – 87 percent, Lower Southampton – 87 percent, Miller – 89 percent, Ferderbar – 89 percent and Schweitzer – 90 percent.  The Intermediate Unit classes and pre-first classes will continue to be housed in some of the elementary schools.  This year the students attending the Pearl Buck School have the longest bus ride, 35 minutes.  The Tawanka students who will be attending the Lower Southampton Elementary School will not have to ride the bus any longer than 35 minutes.  Currently, the students’ (grid 3G) bus ride to the Tawanka School is 25 to 30 minutes.  Their bus ride to the Hoover School will be extended by five minutes. 

Dr. Bowman pointed out the proposed redistricting plan will achieve a balanced capacity utilization, a high of 90 percent and low of 86 percent.  In 2002-2003 the percentage of new students at the affected schools will be as follows:

·          29 percent - Heckman School

·          24 percent - Hoover School

·          49 percent - Lower Southampton School

·          30 percent - Schweitzer  School

Dr. Bowman pointed out when the attendance boundaries are realigned, the Tawanka School will not be the only school impacted. 

Mrs. Butville referred to census grid 3L on the map and noted the Tawanka School students in the surrounding census grids will be attending the Hoover School except those students located in gird 3L.  Those students located in grid 3L will attend the Heckman School.  She recommended the students located in grid 3L attend the Hoover School.  Mr. Marotto pointed out students from three nearby census grids will be redistricted to the Heckman School from the Lower Southampton School.  Dr. Bowman said the students located in grid 3L could be redistricted to the Hoover School and the census grids would still be contiguous.  Mr. Schoenstadt estimated the change would increase the program capacity utilization to 88.4 percent at the Hoover School.  None of the Board members indicated they objected to changing the students located in grid 3L to the Hoover School. 

Mr. Stack noted the redistricting plan will allow the students from Langhorne Terrace I and Langhorne Terrace II to attend the same school, Hoover School.  Mr. Schoenstadt point out over the next three years, the elementary enrollment will decrease by 300-plus students, which will reduce the capacity utilization at some schools.

Mr. Marotto explained the building capacity at the Schweitzer School is reduced by 100 seats because Intermediate Unit classes are held at the school.  The original recommendation was to retain ten of the Intermediate Unit classes throughout the District.  Currently, there are 12 Intermediate Unit classes located in the District.  It may be necessary to reduce the number of Intermediate Unit classes in the District.

Mr. Stack recommended when reviewing current attendance boundaries and the proposed attendance boundaries, consideration be given to where the students will attend middle school.  One of the things that could be accomplished with the redistricting is keeping the same students together through the middle school years.

Mr. Schoenstadt referred to a letter (attachment I) received from the Lower Southampton Board of Supervisors.  The letter asked the Board to use care in its deliberations and take into consideration the impact of the Board’s decisions (i.e., school closing, redistricting, school usage) on the community.  He noted the Lower Southampton Board of Supervisors recognizes that they are a separate entity and have no actual involvement in the Board’s decision making process.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated the Board’s current decision pertains to a school closing.  Any decision regarding usage of the building will be an item for public hearings starting in January when the new Board convenes.  Dr. Bowman said he will work closely with the Lower Southampton Police Chief and Township Manager on the issue.

Mr. Stack stated the decision before the Board, in the short term, is the closing of a school.  Other decisions will have to be acted upon at other times.  He noted redistricting will be a follow-up action by the Board.  A separate action would be the redeployment of a facility that is closed, which would be subject to separate discussions and public input.

      g.  Public Comment

There was a two minutes time limit per speaker.  Ms. Winther, Langhorne, referred to Mr. Schoenstadt’s comments included in the minutes of the August Board Meeting regarding the District allowing 200 students in an alternative school setting.  One hundred of the students would be Neshaminy students and the District could take in another one hundred students from other school districts, which would result in over a million dollars in revenue.  The minutes also include Mr. Eccles’ comments that the Board is here to take care of Neshaminy students first and is not  here to turn a profit.  The School District should not be treated as a business for the purpose of financial gain.  She thanked Mr. Eccles for his position on the issue. 

Ms. Winther advised the Board last month she attended a seminar presented by the President Elect of the PTA.  The message of the seminar was for parents to get involved and work with the School Board in regard to what the parents feel is best for their children.  The School Board is the voice of the people.   She explained she discussed the Tawanka situation with the seminar presenter and was urged to rally together with other parents and attend Board Meetings so the parents could voice their opinions and suggestions.  She noted the Tawanka community members have been voicing their opinions to the Board.  She pointed out that the School Board is the voice of the people and urged the Board to remind itself of this when making its decision.

Dr. McKee, Tawanka Elementary School principal, presented the following statement:

“I want to thank the Board and Cabinet members who were able to come to Tawanka on October 10 to answer questions for the community.  It was important to receive clarification on issues that will impact your decision about our school.  It seems that this is a genuine effort to save the taxpayers some money by more efficient use of our facilities.

We were told that another elementary school was closed in 1976 with minimal impact on the community.  I can believe that.  But in the intervening years, the stresses on the American family have continued to escalate.  National statistics now show that 30 percent of all children will be “at-risk” at some time in their primary years.

Divorce, unemployment, alcoholism and violence have touched many American families.  More children are living in single-parent homes, with grandparents or other relatives, in foster care or are being split between two households.  School staffs have become the mandated reporters of suspected child abuse or neglect when possibly over-whelmed adults make poor choices.  With all this turmoil, it seems to me that our schools are often the only constant, the only safe haven in some of our children’s lives. 

I know you recognize and care about these issues because you have supported the development of programs such as ASSIST, NEST and the Critical Event Response Team.  You funded the cost of at least one full-time guidance counselor in every school and district-wide social workers and a Home and School visitor.

I can appreciate the fact that these people and programs cost money.  You fund them because you know that if the basic needs of the whole child are not met, it is less likely that he or she can focus on learning.  With mounting pressure to meet academic standards, this is no small task.

When you made your decision in August to possibly close Tawanka, you couldn’t have foreseen the recent tragic events and none of us can know the long-range social, financial, emotional ramifications that may be on the horizon for our communities and ourselves.  Among the things we do know is that the continuation of daily, familiar routines are reassuring for children and adults.”

Due to the two minute time limit, Dr. McKee completed her statement later in the meeting.  See page 17 for her concluding comments.

Mr. Edelman, Oakford, stated he is the Vice President of the Neshaminy/Falls Improvement Association.  He advised the Board the Neshaminy/Falls Improvement Association asked the Lower Southampton Township Board of Supervisors to take an active part in what is occurring at the Tawanka School.  He felt the closing of the Tawanka School is more than just a School District issue, because it will not only have a direct affect on Oakford but also Lower Southampton Township.  The closing of the Tawanka School will be a tremendous loss to the neighborhood.  The Tawanka School is one of the finest elementary schools in the District.  The scholastic test scores have improved since last year.  Two years ago, when funding was not available from the District,  the community raised $30,000 for new playground equipment for the Tawanka School.  He felt the Board would be making a mistake by closing the Tawanka School.  He stated 357 good students will be relocated for 56 students who have drug, alcohol and discipline problems at the high school.  It is not a fair trade off for the community or students currently attending the school.  He noted a petition with 460 signatures opposing the closing of the Tawanka School had been previously presented to the Board.  He stated if it will take 460 people voicing their opposition to the closing of the Tawanka School at a Board Meeting for the Board to change its position, he will try to have that many people attend the next meeting. 

Mr. Edelman expressed concern that there are no set plans established for an alternative school.  He recommended since the Maple Point School is at 60 to 65 percent capacity usage, the alternative school be located at the Maple Point building.

Mr. Crosbie, Oakford, stated it is his understanding a school closure was attempted in the Pennsbury School District.  Due to the reaction from the parents, the proposal was disbanded.  He questioned if the school closure is needed and why no one was in attendance supporting the school closure.  If the building was not needed to meet the needs of an alternative school, would any school be considered for closure?    Should taxpayers’ money be used to fund an alternative school?  Has the Board reviewed the impact the school closure will have on property values and businesses in the area?  He urged the Board to keep the Tawanka School open and just redistrict the elementary schools.

Ms. Lanhan, Trevose, stated she is aware the District spends a lot of money educating alternative school students outside of the District.  She pointed out the current state of the nation due to the September 11 terrorist attacks.  Ms. Lanhan expressed concern that now is not the appropriate time to move children from their familiar, comfortable environment and place them in an unknown environment.  She said the students will be safe in any school in the District.  However, the question is will the children feel safe and comfortable.  She said the changes will not result in a savings next year.  She urged the Board in light of the current state of the nation, to delay its decision to close a school. 

Ms. Spina, Langhorne, expressed concern that by closing the Tawanka School, the smallest school, the capacity utilization will be increased at the remaining elementary schools to 85 to 90 percent.  In a few years it will be necessary to close another school, because the elementary enrollment will decrease over the next three years.  She suggested a larger school be closed and the remaining elementary schools’ capacity utilization be increased 92 to 96 capacity.  As enrollment decreases, the capacities would be reduced to 85 to 90 percent. 

Ms. Spina stated she is a proponent of alternative schools.  Something needs to be done for the children who are in need.  She suggested the modular classrooms be relocated to one of the middle schools or the high school and be utilized for an alternative school.  The students who predominately need the alternative school services are high school and middle school students.  By having the alternative school located at a middle school or the high school, the necessary facilities would be available, i.e. cafeteria, etc.  It would be easier to integrate the students back into the mainstream, because they would already be partially part of the mainstream.  The students would not be at the “other school” because they will be at a middle school or the high school where they should be located.  She said by separating the students, you do not make them the same.  You make them separate. 

Ms. Broomhead, Langhorne, stated it is her understanding the closing of the Tawanka School will result in a tax savings of $38 to $65 per year, per family.  She said she would be more than willing to pay the additional $65 in taxes to keep the Tawanka School open.  She recommended all the modular classrooms at the Lower Southampton Elementary School be eliminated.  She expressed concern about the children attending special classes in an environment separate from the school and one that does not have bathroom facilities.  She felt the modular classrooms present a safety issue.  Ms. Broomhead inquired if residents could obtain a copy of the redistricting information presented earlier in the meeting. 

Mr. Stack stated the attendance boundaries information, which was presented earlier in the meeting, will be available on the District’s Web site.  If for some reason it cannot be made available on the Web site, copies of the information will be available at the Tawanka School.

Ms. Luff, expressed disappointment that the Board is considering closing the Tawanka School.  She felt if the Tawanka School is closed, it will result in more students per classroom and the teachers will have a more difficult time reaching each and every child.  She suggested each Board member spend time in the classrooms before reaching a decision on the school closing issue.  She expressed concern that the Board is willing to disrupt hundreds of children, not only from Tawanka, but almost every elementary school in the District.  She said she is upset that the dollar is more important than hundreds of children.  She felt an alternative school is not a good reason for closing an elementary school and the renovations to accommodate the alternative school students will be an additional expense.  She said if the Board chooses to close the Tawanka School, we won’t go away. 

Mr. Werner, Langhorne, noted the District’s population has grown over the years and no new schools have been built.  He inquired about the additional revenue generated by the increased housing.  How was the ideal capacity percentage determined?  How was the class size limits determined?  He suggested consideration be given to reducing the maximum capacity of 27 students per classroom. 

Mr. Werner stated the children have been affected by the terrorist attacks against the United States.  He felt due to the current state of the nation, it is not a good time to relocate students to a new environment/school.  He suggested the Board delay its plans for a year.  Mr. Werner indicated he was opposed to placing all the students with discipline problems in one school, an alternative school.

Ms. Drioli explained legally the District is required to educate every student enrolled in the  District.  The education of every student in the District is regulated by state law.

7.   Items for Approval

      a.  Overnight Trips

Information distributed prior to the meeting self-explanatory.  Dr. Bowman recommended the following trips for Board approval:

·         Wrestlers Beast of the East Tournament – Neshaminy High School – University of Delware, December 14, 15 and 16, 2001

·         State Debate and Speech Tournament – Neshaminy High School – Susquehanna University, March 21-23, 2002

There was Board consensus for the two trips.

In response to a question raised by Mr. Eccles, Dr. Bowman explained because the money was due for the junior class trip early in the school year, no money was committed to the junior class trip.  A combined junior/senior class trip is being planned for next year in the spring.  The money students were saving for this year’s class trip can be applied to next year’s trip. 

Dr. Bowman explained the instrumental music group trip to San Diego was canceled.  The group has been reviewing alternative trips.  One possible trip would be a competition at Myrtle Beach in the spring.  The students would travel to the competition by bus. 

Mr. Stack requested student input be obtained on a combined junior/senior class trip.  He noted a lot of activities take place in the spring for seniors.  He suggested possibly the fall would be a better time for the combined junior/senior class trip.  Mrs. Butville stated the students she has received input from want their own trip.  They do not want a combined junior/senior class trip.  Mrs. Butville expressed concern that a combined junior/senior class trip would involve a very large number of students and may be unmanageable. 

Dr. Bowman explained the primary concern with this year’s trip was the dinner cruise in the harbor, which is a highlight of the trip.  This was a security concern.  After the first of the year, this may no longer be a concern.  At that time, the travel agency wanted a deposit and a commitment, and the District was not in a position to do that at the time due to the issues pertaining to the September 11 terrorist attacks.  Mrs. Butville requested the administration contract the travel agency and determine what is the minimum limit for scheduling a spring class trip this year. Ms. Drioli suggested the junior trip be scheduled for another location this year.  Dr. Bowman explained the trip must be highly structured and activities scheduled for the students throughout the day. Dr.  Bowman stated the administration will explore the possibility of still scheduling the junior class trip for the spring. 

Dr. Bowman advised the Board he has not allowed any large trips this year.  Students were allowed to attend an education program at the Spectrum.  The students were transported by bus.  No trips to New York have been allowed.  The trip issue will be reviewed again after the first of the year.

      b.  Acceptance of 2000-2001 Audit Report

Dr. Bowman advised Board members to complete the Audit Report request form if they would like to receive a copy of the report.  The Audit Report will be presented for approval at the November 27 Board Meeting. 

      c.  High School Diplomas for World War II Veterans

Information distributed prior to meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board five individuals who served in World War II have submitted letters requesting a high school diploma.  The diplomas will be presented as a part of a special ceremony at the November 27, 2001 Board Meeting.  The diplomas are being prepared and caps and gowns will be worn. 

      d.  Contracted Transportation Services for 2001-2002

Dr. Bowman informed the Board the yearly motion for contracted transportation services will be presented at the November 27 Board Meeting.  The District contracts with Middle Earth, Lakeside Youth Services and Huntingdon Valley Christian Academy for the transportation of special education students.  Due to the number of students being transported and the destinations, the contracted transportation services are the most cost effective means to transport the students.  Last year the cost of the transportation was $76,760.  The cost will increase by approximately $8,000 to approximately $84,000.

      e.  School Authority Appointments

Information distributed prior to meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board there will be an Authority opening at the Lower Bucks County School Authority (January 6, 2002).  A new appointment is not necessary, because the Authority will likely be dissolved by September.  Mr. Stack stated even though no funds will be expended for projects, there could be some continuing contract work that the Authority will need to oversee. 

Dr. Bowman explained the Technical School Authority has one opening.  The appointment expired on January 7, 2001.  If no action is taken, the individual will continue to serve on the Technical School Authority.  If the Board wishes to make a new appointment, it should advise the administration and it will be addressed in January.

       f.  Tawanka School Closing

A Board motion pertaining to the Tawanka School closing will be presented at the November 27 Board Meeting.

      g.  Approval of Bids and Budget Transfers

No bids were reviewed.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board the budget transfers will be included as a part of the Board mailing for the November 27 Board Meeting.  Board members having any questions regarding the budget transfers should contact Mrs. Donovan. 

8.   Items for Information

      a.  PIAA Hazing Resolution

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman informed the Board copies of the Pennsylvania State Athletic Directors Association Hazing Resolution have been posted in the District’s buildings and made available to all coaches.  Hazing has not been an issue in the District. 

      b.  Class of 2001 Senior Survey

Information distributed prior to meeting self-explanatory.  Dr. Bowman briefly reviewed the senior survey and profile information.  He noted the following:

·         80 percent of students attending some form of higher education

·         2 percent of students entering the military

·         8 percent of students employed

·         7 percent of students undecided

·         1.7 percent of students did not graduate

·         .75 percent of students returning to complete high school diploma

·         Over 90 percent of  students had a career plan in place upon graduation

9.   Superintendent’s Report

Dr. Bowman explained the Pennsylvania School Boards Association has an Honor Roll of School Board Service.  School Board Directors are recognized when they reach exactly ten, fifteen, twenty, twenty-five, thirty, etc. years of service.  Dr. Bowman announced a Certificate of Appreciation from the Executive Board of the Pennsylvania School Boards Association has been awarded to Mr. Harry Dengler for ten years of service.  Mr. Stack presented the Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. Dengler. 

10. Committee Reports

      a.  Educational Development Committee

Mr. Mecleary reported the committee will meet on November 20 at 7:00 p.m.  The agenda includes grade seven Social Studies/World Geography Program update and Channel One.  Mrs. Butville recommended the committee also discuss technology readiness and integration into the curriculum.  Mr. Mecleary indicated the technology issue would be a future agenda item.

      b.  Educational Foundation

Mr. Dengler reported the Foundation is still accepting donations for the Wall of Honor.

      c.  Building Utilization/Finance Committee

Mr. Schoenstadt noted the building utilization issue was discussed under agenda item “School District architect for renovations and construction.”  The next committee meeting will be scheduled in coordination with the development of the contract with the architect.

      d.  Intermediate Unit Board

Mrs. Butville reported she toured selected Intermediate Unit classrooms in the area and was very impressed with the teaching staff, facilities and students served by the Intermediate Unit.

      e.  Board Policies Committee

Information distributed at meeting.  Mrs. Butville reported the committee has added the use of drug sniffing dogs to the District’s Search of Students and Seizure of Evidence Policy.  Also attached to the policy are three of the notices that will be distributed.  It is the Board Policies Committee’s recommendation that the policy be presented for approval at the November 27 Board Meeting. 

Mr. Mecleary pointed out that our newly elected District Attorney does not agree with the drug sniffing dog concept.  He said it may or may not be legal within the confines of the Constitution and the standards put in effect in schools.  The atmosphere that drug sniffing dogs present in the high school is appalling.  Mrs. Butville pointed out the dogs are not allowed to come in contact with any person.  The dogs would be used to search around the property, hallways and lockers when no student is present.  The dogs are trained to have a certain response if they find a certain scent.  If  the dogs indicate they have found something, the administration would be notified first and the police if necessary.  No dog will be allowed to sniff a person. 

Dr. Bowman stated if the policy is adopted, it will be enacted.  The Board will not be notified in advance of the searches by the drug sniffing dogs.  It is a preventive measure.  The concept is the same as when a student advises the administration another student has drugs in their locker.  The administration has the right to inspect the locker.  The police would not be involved until the locker is inspected and if something is found. 

Mr. Mecleary inquired what would occur in regard to staff members.  Mrs. Bostwick stated appropriate action would be taken.  There will be no discrimination.  Mr. Mecleary questioned if the search of staff members’ property is constitutional.  He pointed out the standards are not the same for staff and students.  Mrs. Butville stated if a staff member brings an illegal substance onto the District’s property, the District has the right to investigate it.  At that point the police would be involved.  Mr. Mecleary said is the search and seizure of the person’s property constitutional?  Mrs. Butville stated this issue has been discussed and Mr. Fleck stated there was no problem with this aspect of the policy.  She stated if the individual was at the mall and found to have in his/her possession an illegal substance, it would be the same situation.  Mr. Schoenstadt said drug sniffing dogs were first used in malls and lead to the idea of using the dogs in school district buildings, because they are also public property.  

Mr. Schoenstadt said there is a certain amount of control the District can exercise and sometimes you go beyond that point.  He said he did not know if the policy steps over the border of common sense, good judgment and necessity.  Some of the things the community accepts as common and ordinary, the District finds to be illegal and abusive. 

Ms. Drioli noted there are laws in place regarding alcohol and children.  The law stipulates adults cannot give alcohol to anyone under 21 years old.  She pointed out other school districts are using dogs to find illegal substances on school district property.  She said she has been told by students that drugs are dealt in the District’s schools by some of the better students.  This is a very sad situation. 

Mr. Schoenstadt inquired if the parents have been surveyed in regard to the use of drug sniffing dogs in the School District.  No survey has been conducted. 

Mr. Eccles inquired what would happen if a dog indicates there may be something in a locker and it is found upon opening the locker there is nothing illegal in the locker.  Dr. Bowman explained it is very clear the lockers are the property of the School District and not the property of the students.  Students are advised the administration has the right to inspect lockers. 

In response to questions about searches of cars, Mr. Wyatt explained in the Student Handbook and parking contract that a student signs there are statements which indicate the School District reserves the right to search any car brought onto the campus by a student.  If a dog alerts on a locker or car, the locker or car would be searched in the presence of the student.  Dr. Bowman stated this is the procedure currently followed.  The difference would be that the dog would provide an indication that something may be there.

Ms. Drioli felt the use of drug sniffing dogs will act as a deterrent and probably will not stop the use of drugs in the community.  Mrs. Butville said this is one way to protect the students.  Mr. Stack said the Board needs to look at the steps that can be taken to enhance the educational process.  The use of drug sniffing dogs is a step that can be taken that will reduce the likelihood of drugs being brought into school.

Mrs. Butville advised the Board that the solicitor has reviewed the policy and approved it.  She noted the company being considered suggested the Board have a policy in place before the dogs are used in the schools.  The company provided several sample policies.  The Board Policies Committee reviewed the Board’s existing policy and expanded the policy to include the drug sniffing dogs.

Mr. Mecleary inquired what would occur if a dog sniffs out alcohol in a staff member’s car.  Dr. Bowman explained the faculty parking lot is separate from the student parking lot.  If a dog alerts on a staff member’s car, the staff member would be notified.  He pointed out the policy is a student policy (500 section) and not an employee policy. 

Mrs. Butville explained the committee asked if the policy needed to be included in the employee policy section, and was advised by the solicitor that the Board did not need to include it in the employee policy section.  Ms. Drioli said the Board is not trying to control the teachers, but to create a better environment for the students. 

Mr. Stack encouraged Board members to contact Mr. Fleck’s office with their questions/concerns regarding the policy.  The policy will be an agenda item at the November 27 Board Meeting.

      f.  Technical School Board

Mr. Dengler reported an administrators compensation plan has been put in place at the Technical High School for the next six years. 

      g.  Technology Committee

Mr. Stack reported the committee met on October 16.  He advised the Board the fiber optic connections in all of the schools are 95 percent complete.  This will allow for the possibility of distance learning to be put in place.  The committee reviewed various projects in progress, i.e., high school graduation mini-lab and catalog, circulation, network software at Neshaminy Middle School.  The committee discussed the future direction of technology in the District, particularly at the elementary level.  He noted the software in the elementary schools is nine to ten years old.  The question is should the elementary computer labs be upgraded and/or should PCs be installed in the classrooms.  The committee has recommended obtaining an estimate for providing the necessary wiring in the elementary classrooms to allow for the installation of PCs in the individual classrooms. 

Mr. Stack stated he did not believe technology funding should be obtained from the general budget, because it is in excess of $1,000,000.  In the past, the Board has funded technology improvements with a four to five year loan.  Currently, the District’s debt structure is very low and the District has been encouraged to use debt much more efficiently than it does currently.  Feedback is needed in regard to where is the best place to integrate technology, i.e., classrooms or computer labs.  This is an issue that the Educational Development Committee needs to review.  Mr. Stack noted the Intermediate Unit has abandoned its fiber optic program. 

11. Future Topics

Mr. Stack stated two future topics are the Neshaminy Ice Hockey Club and the monthly radio show.  Mr. Eccles stated the Board has tried to institute a one hour “Speak Your Piece” program on WBCB.  During the program the members of the public can call in and ask questions pertaining to  School District issues.  Board members and administrators have participated in the four shows broadcast to date.  He felt the program is advantageous for the community, because it provides a forum for residents to ask questions and receive answers.  He inquired if there is Board consensus to continue the program. 

Mrs. Butville explained an audio tape of the radio program is made and the high school video class formats it for broadcasting on the Neshaminy cable channel.  Ms. Drioli suggested high school students be invited to participate on the program by discussing something they are excited about at the high school, football team, school trip issue, etc. 

Mr. Eccles noted the only time the program has been marketed is at School Board Meetings.  He proposed the Board enter into a long term relationship, one year, with WBCB to run the program.  The program could be marketed by the Board by including information on the program in the monthly newsletters sent home to parents.  This would eliminate the obligation of obtaining sponsors for the program.  It would allow the Board to barter for advertising for the radio station and establish a long term relationship with WBCB.  He felt WBCB has more to gain from the arrangement than the District.  However, it will provide the District with “baby steps” in the area of finding different ways to raise funds.  It will be a good learning experience for the Board.

Mr. Schoenstadt indicated he was in favor of Mr. Eccles’ proposal.  He recommended a monthly Neshaminy newsletter, which includes the radio program’s agenda, be sent home to parents.  The newsletter could include the current hot topics and outline specific information, i.e., redistricting plan, possible uses of closed school building, etc.  Mr. Marotto stated currently every elementary and middle school sends home a monthly newsletter. 

Mrs. Butville suggested the next radio program be scheduled for January.  Dr. Bowman explained a December 18 program date has already been established. 

There was Board consensus to pursue Mr. Eccles’ proposal.

12. Agenda Development for the November 27, 2001 Public Meeting

Dr. Bowman briefly reviewed the agenda items for the November 27 Board Meeting.

13. Correspondence

      There was no correspondence.

14. Other Board Business

      a.  Senate School Finance Committee Hearing

Information distributed at meeting.  Mrs. Butville explained two separate proposals were presented, one by PSBA and the other by Senator Rhoades.  The proposals contain two separate formulas but they are somewhat similar.  Both proposals call for switching the heavy tax burden from the local taxpayer to the state.  Mr. Schoenstadt explained the proposals call for changes in the reliance on funding education in Pennsylvania from the real estate tax to the reliance on an increase in the personal income tax, which is a tax on earned income.  Doubling the personal income tax from 2.8 percent to 5.6 percent will provide the $7.5 billion necessary to fund education and reduce the real estate  tax by 53 percent in Neshaminy.

Mrs. Butville felt it is very likely a change in the tax structure will be approved.  Dr. Frank noted since Pennsylvania is a very large and diverse area, it is difficult to develop a tax plan that is fair to everyone.  Mr. Schoenstadt advised the Board at the meeting Senator Rhoades said his region has been an obstacle to any change.  The proposed funding formula will give his region an advantage over what they have now without penalizing them.  At the same time, Neshaminy will benefit because it will allow the real estate tax to be reduced.  However, the personal income tax will be increased.  Mrs. Butville noted the proposal takes into consideration the great increase in actual special education costs. 

Mr. Stack noted that Governor Schwieker has stated he feels the school districts currently have all they need as to how revenue should be raised and to finance the schools.  Mr. Stack stated he does not agree with that opinion.  He noted the Board has taken a lot of time reviewing the various aspects of Act 50.  The Board has not acted upon an earned income tax for a variety of reasons.  He felt there are some aspects of the new proposal that are worth some further discussion.  He recommended a letter be drafted to Governor Schwieker, copying our representatives,  expressing the Board’s interest in continued discussion of the issue.  There was Board consensus to have Mr. Stack work with Dr. Costanzo and Mrs. Butville to draft a letter to Governor Schwieker.  The letter will be reviewed with the Board at the next meeting.

      b.  Newly Elected Board Members

Mr. Stack introduced the two newly elected Board members, Mrs. Kimberly Jowett and Dr. William Spitz.  He wished them good luck.

15. Board Comment

The following is the remainder of Dr. McKee’s comments.  See page 9 for Dr. McKee’s earlier comments.

Dr. McKee said “I respectfully ask you, where better for us to start to make the essential difference for all children than at the elementary level?  The staffs at schools with lower enrollments simply have more opportunity to address these issues…issues that have become more prevalent in recent decades and recent months.

I was struck by the recent series of television commercials that focus on the intrinsic joys of life while touting the use of their credit cards.  Allow me to paraphrase them as you create a picture of Tawanka in your minds.

What’s the cost differential this year to taxpayers if Tawanka closes?  Less than 15 cents a day per household.

What’s the value of the terrific Tawanka Elementary School experience for children and families if it remains open?  Priceless.”

Mr. Schoenstadt suggested the Board consider authorizing inclusion of the redistricting information, the fact that meetings regarding usage of the building will begin in January and meeting dates in the Tawanka Newsletter.

Dr. Frank questioned how much more input the Board needs.  The Board has been listening to public input over a year.  She said the only thing she has heard is don’t close the school.  Mr. Schoenstadt said if the decision is made at the November 27 Public Meeting to close the Tawanka School, the community should be advised of the redistricting plan.  He suggested since all but three of the elementary schools will be affected by redistricting, all the elementary schools’ newsletters include the proposed redistricting plan.  This would be subsequent to the decision at the November 27 Board Meeting.

Ms. Drioli suggested the public be made aware of the following information:

·         Impact of reinvesting in the District.

·         Importance of balancing the capacity in the schools.

·         One-third of the District’s population are senior citizens.

·         Future use of the closed building has not been decided.  An alternative school is one consideration.

·         Approximately 20 percent of the students from the Tawanka School attendance area would attend the alternative school.

·         Cost of educating alternative education students outside of the District versus in the District.

·         Utilizing the closed building as a school versus another use.

Mr. Stack pointed out a newsletter is not scheduled to be distributed between now and the next Board Meeting.  The administration will make additional information available on the District’s Web site.  He stated after taking further action later this month, there will need to be further discussion and meetings on follow-up activities from that action.

Mr. Eccles noted the Neshaminy Redskins are eleven and zero and are playing Friday night.  He announced the Sandburg Middle School football team is also undefeated.  The team will be playing a Central Bucks team for the championship.

Dr. Frank moved the meeting be adjourned and Mrs. Bostwick seconded the motion.  The Board unanimously approved the motion.  Mr. Stack adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m.

Respectively submitted,

Carol A. Calvello
Board Secretary

Copyright ^© 1998- 2007 Neshaminy School District, Langhorne, PA  19047. 215-809-6000. All rights reserved. 
 Contact Us: Email  Webmaster  with questions or comments. Last modified: August 17, 2007.